Re: Any relevance here? Judi
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "judirhodes"
> --- In email@example.com, "Harveythe
> Schneider" <haarvi1@n...> wrote:
> > >
> > Hi Judi,
> > Thanks for contuing the dialogue. I know you are onto
> something. I have often thought that the best solution
> > to a problem is to realize that there really is no problem.
> ***** Sure, that's what everyone is trying to "accomplish", but the
> act of trying to accomplish is what suffering, (the problem), is
> itself, so hence, it can't be "accomplished". There is no "place"
> or "state" that "you" can eventually reach. That's the whole carrot
> and the donkey routine that has you by the balls. Obviously then,
> only solution to THAT problem is your death. Darn! :-) Not forIt's true.
> weenies my friend!
*Understanding* requires nerve.
The nerve to let go of "me" and "my reality"
without any clue of what comes next, or
whether there is a next.
This letting go is generally not a possibility --
because people think there is another option
(to continue as a self) ...
Yet this letting go is inevitable when it is clear that
"holding on" is the only thing maintaining
the me and its reality as if that were real.
As real as it seems, it is nothing but a holding on --
or nothing but suffering as you like to call it ...
"Holding on" and "accomplishing" as you used that
term above are very intertwined, as is "suffering,"
as is Gautama's idea of "attachment," as is
Jesus' idea of "gaining the world but losing
your being" ...